At that meeting, a woman who looked very similar to Miranda told the other Greenwich residents that:

"I'd just like to say that I moved to the borough two and a half years ago. I'm very excited that we have got the Olympics here in London and in Greenwich as well and I can't believe how narrow minded and short sighted and nimbyist so many people are being..."

She went on to say that she was 26 and found it 'sad' that there was so many older people complaining about (Labour's) plans for the Olympic legacy in the borough.

She did not say what, if any political interest she had in the matter.

So is this woman and Miranda one and the same person? Well here's Miranda's tweet from the day of the debate:

Unfortunately Richard never replied, but I do wonder just how close Miranda is to the party she says is "on our side"

And if Miranda is as close as her Twitter accounts suggest, then is it really okay for her to be portrayed as just another contented resident of Greenwich?

"to defeat damaging bloggers, and also confront the constant criticism of politicians, both locally and nationally which only serves "to reduce voter turnout and help party's like the BNP".

Mayor Coleman said:

“There are a few people that I would not like to thank, those bloggers that think anyone involved in civic life whether it is an elected politicians or professional officers is fair game for personal abuse and whose mission it is to undermine and denigrate. Whilst mayor of this borough I will not tolerate anyone in this chamber or outside who regard it cool and trendy to undermine democratic institutions, and I do not have time for those who have community criticism rather (than) community service".

Monday, 18 May 2009

"Nick Griffin's organization has found a new way of spreading its election propaganda. The BNP are paying for advertising space on the websites of local newspapers. Many of these adverts consist of a large banner headline that stretches across the top of the front page above the newspaper's title.

"They make local newspaper websites look like a BNP publication, with the slogans of the extreme right-wing party dominating the page. Other formats include a simple BNP logo and a video box. Clicking on the adverts takes the reader via a link straight to the BNP's website. All titles noted so far belong to the giant 'Newsquest' group that owns hundreds of local newspapers across the country, and has 164 of what it calls 'local media brand websites'."

"London is laughing at this ludicrous campaign. Saying 'Sorry' for the past smacks of a Soviet courtroom 'confession'. 'Sorry' has all the hallmarks of a KGB-style smear campaign. It denigrates the judgment of 500,000 loyal readers who have been buying the paper in recent years.

And, according to the dozens of emails I have received, it is utterly humiliating for the staff and contributors. They are in despair."

Well at least one of them is.

"The new management seems to think that a paper should be edited by self-serving market research - and the Pravda-style promise of good news is an insult to the intelligence of its readers."

"Under my editorship, the award-winning Standard campaigned against corruption and waste of taxpayers' money at City Hall. The Russian-owned Standard now appears to want to dump Boris Johnson, one of the most popular politicians in the country, and reinstate Ken Livingstone, the discredited mayor who was voted out of office by London.

The Standard, supported by the electorate, called it right and Ken's supporters still cannot deal with that. The Russian owner, motivated by his own political convictions, is plainly out of touch with Londoners.

The 'Sorry' campaign's suggestion that the Standard and its journalists lost touch with London is a malicious invention. Daily, we campaigned for better and safer public transport, a cleaner city, affordable housing, the rights of cyclists and police accountability.

We received endless praise for championing the arts and talents of a great city. And we raised huge sums of money for London charities including most recently over £200,000 for Greenhouse which provides sports facilities for disadvantaged children.

As for Geordie Greig, well, Etonians have a history of collaborating with the KGB."

Ha ha ha! I've had some mixed feelings about the new look Evening Sorry, but this statement has gone some way to redress those.

Now I wonder who could have been sending her those 'dozens of emails'?

Friday, 8 May 2009

"After viewing web-cast footage of the [select committee] meeting, the GLA’s Sub-Committee did find that, at one point, the Mayor did say “nonsense, bollocks, nonsense.” The GLA’s Sub- Committee considered that, in itself, the term “bollocks” is not disrespectful, and noted that none of the members of the Select Committee took offence.

"In addition to this, the GLA’s Sub-Committee were of the view that the Mayor said this word quietly, under his breath, and then quickly sought to correct himself by repeating the word “nonsense.” For these reasons, along with the fact that the Select Committee was a political arena, the GLA’s Sub-Committee concluded that the Mayor’s use of the term “bollocks” was not a failure to treat others with respect, and did not bring his office or the Authority into disrepute."

For me however, the danger is not that the problem didn't exist, but that it did and that these ads are just ramming that point home.

The danger for them now is that this could easily become Geordie Grieg's own Gerald Ratner moment: the moment where Standard readers finally realise just what old crap they've been buying all these years.

And so while for grabbing attention, the campaign has worked, if Londoners are really going to believe the paper has changed then it's a change in substance that needs to be made.

The Conservatives today declared the election of a Green party member to Chair the London Assembly as a 'squalid stitch up' by 'a ragbag of minorities'

Speaking at today's Assembly AGM, Tony Arbour said:

"London is a Conservative City. We control all of the boroughs. Last year we demonstrated we dominate London-wide politics and on June 4th we will be crushing all of the other parties in London...

"We have had a demonstration this morning of how ridiculous proportional representation really is. Because of a squalid stitch up between a rag bag of minorities, has meant that this Assembly in its every day activities is dominated by people who do not represent London."

Also speaking against the election of Darren Johnson, disgraced former Chairman Brian Coleman said:

"In moving [for Andrew Boff instead of Johnson] the Assembly will have a Chairman who will not be briefed against by their own group. Who will turn up at functions when he is expected to turn up at functions. Who will not have to be accompanied by an officer on to the eighth floor in case they say something out of place or surrender without a fight...

"Who can make a decent speech at a public function. Who does not need a word for word briefing for Assembly meetings and can deal with unexpected occurrences whether they're in the public gallery or on the floor of this chamber. Who can restore the dignity of this Assembly and reassert its authority in relation to the Executive and allow this Assembly to do the job that Londoner's elected it to do...

"and who also won't serve roast beef without horseradish sauce at dinner."

The speech by Coleman (who did not go into detail about the horseradish incident) was described as 'offensive' by other AMs.

Departing Chair Jennette Arnold also pointed out that she had attented functions at 'a quarter' of the cost of Brian Coleman when he had been the Assembly Chair.

Why the Conservatives should be stitched up

If the London Assembly was a legislative body then of course I agree that it should be led by the group with the largest share of the vote.

But with it's only role being to scrutinise a Conservative Mayor then it makes no sense that the scrutinising should be led by the Conservative AMs themselves.

And while Andrew Boff would also probably make a good chairman, the same cannot be said of the Tories' candidate for Deputy Chair Lady Victoria Borwick.

Earlier this year Borwick was investigated and then apologised for using her position on the Transport Committee to promote her husband's electric vehicle business.

You can read a very interesting interview with the new Chairman of the Assembly over at Mayorwatch.

-Update- Nick points out in the comments that the Tory group made a very similar 'stitch-up' deal with the Lib Dems in 2004. Hypocrites.

"The market research evidently discovered that Londoners considered the paper to be too negative, not celebratory enough and guilty of failing to cater for the capital's needs. A great city with great facilities was being persistently talked down.

"Greig's response to the findings was to deal with them head on. He takes the view that the only possible way to win back readers who have deserted, and attract new ones, is to be honest and admit to previous failings."

The adverts, which will run on the paper's hated bus and tube network, come ahead of a full relaunch of the title on May 11th.

Advertising slogans are expected to include "Sorry for losing touch," "Sorry for being negative," "Sorry for taking you for granted," "Sorry for being complacent," and "Sorry for being predictable."

The campaign will be seen as a slap in the face for despised former editor Veronica Wadley and pet cat Andrew Gilligan, under whose miserable reign the paper hemorrhaged Londoner's remaining respect.

Meanwhile, the decision to talk up London and its people is thought to have been greeted with the sound of loud cheers from the eighth floor of City Hall.